[PD] Re: [PD-dev] Re: prepend w/ set message - ignore
hans at eds.org
Fri Nov 12 21:04:21 CET 2004
This sounds like a perfect comprimise! I can't think of any serious
disadvantages to this.
On Nov 12, 2004, at 11:30 AM, Krzysztof Czaja wrote:
> hi all,
> Frank Barknecht wrote:
>> yes, there are these cases and those cases. However, the limitation of
>> [prepend] is not annoying enough to break compatibility, IMO. ALso you
> in case of prepend, I think, there is a compromise possible. An
> object would get the second inlet, but only when instantiated,
> max-incompatibly, without arguments. The 'set' method would still
> modify the argument, but only if a) creation arguments were
> provided, and b) the global max-compatibility flag was set.
> Otherwise, the 'set' method would call the 'anything' method.
> I do not think, it is a good idea to have a [prepend this] in
> a patch, which actually prepends 'that' (after being set to
> 'that'). Such objects should read just [prepend].
> I wonder, how many maxers use the 'set' feature of prepend? Or if
> they tend to use zl join, perhaps?
> Interestingly, sending a single word 'set' to a prepend crashes
> Max on the next message to the object... I am talking about,
> 4.3.2, the last version I was determined enough to find money
> Which is why my advocatus diaboli role is on halt...
> PD-list at iem.at mailing list
> UNSUBSCRIBE and account-management ->
More information about the Pd-list